is GT6's photo mode better than Forza 5?

[cloudskipa]

The problem with Forza's texturing is how fake often the result it looks. One of the causes is the lack of cohesion between different elements, like a photo collage made with raw-cutted layers of random pictures with no relation between them. With different color grading and contrast, different level of detail, wrong scaling with the world (yes again), different lighting, etc.

In a "collage" like that, higher resolution photos are not going to give more realism if first the photo cuts does not blend naturally in order to mimic the desired real picture (track). That is another factor of the infamous cartoonish graphics attribued to Forza. If you focus the photo at a close-up texture can looks reallistic (is just a photo of a photo) but if the camera is positioned in a farther view, with other elements on track, the illusion is very different. There are other factors that remove realism like overdoing the details (asphalt cracks, skidmarks, bump mapping) or repeating a texture along a track as a "carpet". Basically Forza lacks in the art department.

Not entirely sure what you're getting at to be honest. I didn't post that picture to try and suggest "OMGZ Forza 5 is so realistic!!1!", maybe I shouldn't of used that word I just thought the track detail was worth a photo and the little things like the paint splatter look so good.

I fully accept that when taken as a whole, Forza is not the most realistic looking game, though there are times (like racing on Silverstone from dashcam) where it can do, under the same context I don't find GT realistic looking either. I like the way Turn 10 focus more on making the game look "pretty" than gritty and realistic, it certainly has it's own charm and for that I have to disagree wholeheartedly with your suggestion that it "lacks in the art department" since they haven't taken the easy route and attempted to mimic real life. Of course, like anything based around artistic direction it becomes fully subjective but I think there's no denying they've brought their own specific flavour to the sim table and in a genre where so many games look alike that can only be a good thing.

 

[cloudskipa]

Yeah the picture wasn't loading on my page hence i deleted it. The illuminateed grill has been like that forever, it depends on the location and light direction, but it doesn't really bother me at all, till you brought it up. The headlights on the Ruf in Forza look a bit foggy compared to the one in Gt. No all cars in Forza are premium and offer an Forzavista experience. There..happy now


Ps: im still not quite sure whats wrong with the headlights of the F50.



Them pics are meh, i've seen better in the photomode section, but i will agree that Gt's lighting engine is just better but, that doesn't mean Forza photomode cant look better than one from GT.

Does this not look photorealistic too you?

Yes exactly, FM5 can look "photo realistic" or close to, it depends on a number of factors but it has to be said the lighting in Forza 5 is all dependent on what track we're talking about since it varies so much. Silverstone and Nordschleife both have a realistic look to them, take a track like the Alps though and it's nowhere near as photogenic if you're aiming for "realism" (which appears to be synonymous with "bland" going by this thread).

 

[mykem]

If PD has problem with engine sound, Forza's equivalent to that is the headlight and the back/signal light because they just look weird. And it's been like that since forever.

 

[Terronium-12]

This thread is dangerously close to being locked. It's no longer about the comparisons between Forza's and GT's photomode, it's devolved into a proverbial pissing contest having nothing at all to do with anything regarding the actual subject matter.

The borderline inflammatory comments, the trolling, responding to people that are banned in the same manner that got them banned in the first place - all of that nonsense ends now.

 

[Zer0]

I have to disagree wholeheartedly with your suggestion that it "lacks in the art department" since they haven't taken the easy route and attempted to mimic real life. Of course, like anything based around artistic direction it becomes fully subjective

Attempting to mimic the real life is the most challenging thing that a developer can aspire. Technological (man research and factors involved), artistic (atention to detail and fidelity) and resources intensive (hardware). No matter if we speak of visuals, sounds or physics.

There is no subjectivism involved in the real world laws of physics. A game it can look closer or farther and that is what it's judging here at the time of compare. Are very detailed cars and tracks trying to look the closer to the real thing with photographic textures, laser scannings, etc not a painting. So, when something is not rendered accordingly, it shines like a beacon on the horizon.

 

[cloudskipa]

Attempting to mimic the real life is the most challenging thing that a developer can aspire. Technological (man research and factors involved), artistic (atention to detail and fidelity) and resources intensive (hardware). No matter if we speak of visuals, sounds or physics.

There is no subjectivism involved in the real world laws of physics. A game it can look closer or farther and that is what it's judging here at the time of compare. Are very detailed cars and tracks trying to look the closer to the real thing with photographic textures, laser scannings, etc not a painting. So, when something is not rendered accordingly, it shines like a beacon on the horizon.

Doesn't have to be quite so black and white, Turn 10 do absolutely adhere to realism obviously, in terms of physics, sound, accuracy of tracks and vehicles and an awful lot of time and money is spent on R&D but it doesn't stop them deliberately putting their own unique visual stamp on the game.

 

[Zer0]

Doesn't have to be quite so black and white, Turn 10 do absolutely adhere to realism obviously, in terms of physics, sound, accuracy of tracks and vehicles and an awful lot of time and money is spent on R&D but it doesn't stop them deliberately putting their own unique visual stamp on the game.

Anyone is denying that they are trying, and regard the black and white is what I already said, "closer" and "farther" means staying inside a range of greys, being "black" the real life and "whitte" a cel shaded game.

 

[Stylel_Code]

Ok so I tried something there. In order to contribue to this thread, I had time to reproduce 3 shots from FM5 from the photomode forum since I don't have the game, so all credits go to them. So these are approximations of their shots, none from me edited. I hope you enjoy.

From SimTourist:

From JPinto:

 

[GrandTurismo]

@Stylel_Code

Do this one.

 

[emula]

@Stylel_Code

Do this one.

 

[TheAdmiester]

In those comparison pictures, are the Vipers different models or is one of them inaccurate? Forza's model curves in a lot before sticking out on the lip for the bumper, the GT model seems to just be flat.

Besides the Jag shot looking better in Forza, I'd say they're all too similar to pick a better one.

As for the photomode itself, I think Forza's is a lot better just because you can see how your picture will look without taking it. GT's motion blur and DOF aren't applied until you render the image, although it is a nice bonus that you can make the image 2x the size.

 

[Stylel_Code]

In those comparison pictures, are the Vipers different models or is one of them inaccurate? Forza's model curves in a lot before sticking out on the lip for the bumper, the GT model seems to just be flat.

They're different model because the exact one from forza 5 is a standard car in GT6, so i took another close one.

Here two more for the comparison, unedited. The first one from Forza might probably be edited because of the low contrast and maybe vibrance, second one maybe too.

From Minty:

 

[gtuned]

As for the photomode itself, I think Forza's is a lot better just because you can see how your picture will look without taking it. GT's motion blur and DOF aren't applied until you render the image, although it is a nice bonus that you can make the image 2x the size.

Um. Few things wrong with that, but lets start at that doesn't equal better.

Forza doesn't render blur, or depth properly. Forza just renders motion blur, GT renders actual blur. Forza just adds some motion and radial blur and calls it a day, but what GT does is actually replicates a real camera and motion blur. The little movements and turns and bumps are realistically replicated when it renders the picture, which is also something GT does differently.

GT Renders an image, Forza just captures it. Like with the depth and blur, those are just effects more or less, IMO. It recognizes what is in motion basically and blurs that, but GT will take what you set on the camera, then render those settings, so if a car is still, then moves, it'll render it like that. Or say you have a wheel turned in a replay shot, if you time it right, when you have it set to 1/60, GT will render that wheel turning back in when you center the steering back.

And GT does add Depth when shooting, it just renders it fully after capture.


But again, I'm not saying Forza's is worse. Forza's is easier for those who just like taking pictures. Forza lets you take and slightly edit within game, while GT is giving you a real camera. So that's why Forza may have a better "Straight From Game" realism/quality, but all in all, they're still being edited.

 

[Eager Snake]

As a photographer myself, I'm utterly in love with the Photomode in GT.
I would have loved it even more if we only had a little bit more of shutter speed and some other details, but overall, the way the game handles the real behaviour of a camera it's pretty damn accurate.
I've not tried the PM in Forza, but the pictures are very good. I've seen some great examples, but realistically speaking, as far as I know from what I've seen and tried in GT, PD's photomode is far more precise in terms of realism.

 

[bashfulboson]

I'd still would love to know what framerate has to do with photomode... is anyone else confused by that? As for your little 2d trees issue...



I don't see how 2d trees are that big of an issue. Sure fully modeled trees would be nice, but I honestly don't care. Then you'd have everyone complaining that PD modeled trees.

This thread was rather civilized to a degree a while ago where people were actually discussing and debating, giving credit to both games and pointing out their flaws, but now it's just reducing to every other Forza/GT thread.

Just to mention that even Forza 5 uses 2D trees in Nurburgring rahter than 3D

I have been reading the excuse of the color palette to justify the Forza graphics since the first Forza and not, it does not work like that.

Photorealism is not just adjusting the color levels in photoshop to your prefered reallistic style. That could work to an extent one time for a single static image but is not a magic formula that could be applied to an entire game to patch what is not physically rendered. A photorealistic engine is a very dynamic thing and depends of a lot of physical factors and computed effects, "colors" change every time in a very complex iteration with the light and environment. To start, Forza lacks some of the required effects and represent wrong others. Try to edit any cherry-picked FM5 image to your likings and then use the same steps with the same parameters in other images and will not work the same. If FM5 will be adjusted with linear levels it would look very bland and unrealistic, far from the extremely well calibrated GT6 all visual components. The excessive high contrasted and colorful style in the Forza games is a patch to hide some of the rendering flaws and make it look graphically appealing in its own style.

For example, it's not remotely possible that the first gif will become comparable in realism to the second just with some postprocessing color changes within its graphical engine.

GT6 has HDR that is much realistic than Forza

 

[X30 Driv3r]

Sorry for OT.

Is that still someone else noticed that the Mazda from FM5 has no wipers?

 

[IneedSchool]

FM5 on 8 Gigabyte of RAM:


GT6 on 256 megabyte of RAM:

 

[ron86]

Other tracks in GT6 have some great textures too -->

 

[ProjectWHaT]

Instead of posting pictures from the in game cameras, how about some pictures of the cameras in game and a list of features each game has for their camera?

 

[Tutorialtest]

PS3 strong Old next gen so close XboxOne is next gen! HAHA!

SONY and Polyphony THE KING!

GT7 on PS4 Would great full realistic than FLOPZA!

 

[Stylel_Code]

Instead of posting pictures from the in game cameras, how about some pictures of the cameras in game and a list of features each game has for their camera?

What would be the point of this?

 

[IneedSchool]

PS3 strong Old next gen so close XboxOne is next gen! HAHA!

SONY and Polyphony THE KING!

GT7 on PS4 Would great full realistic than FLOPZA!

I know you're new to GTPlanet, and I agree that I prefer GT's photomode, but may you please act more mature? Stop making yourself look like a fool.

 

[gtuned]

Instead of posting pictures from the in game cameras, how about some pictures of the cameras in game and a list of features each game has for their camera?

I found a video of Forza 5's on youtube and got a srcreencap from it

Now, it's basic. Really basic. But like I said before, it's meant for people who just want to take pictures. No idea what the Focus slider does, nor can I remember from Forza 4, but it's definitely more of just a Capture Tool than a Camera to me. Also, I want to point out the Contrast/Color/Brightness sliders, which take into a huge part of Forza's shots being "better" than GT's. If you touch any of those sliders, You're editing the shot just as we do with GT6, with using Curves.

And here's GT6's. This is much, much more true to looking through a real DSLR viewfinder. Your shutter speed, aperture, focal length and exposure are all realistic. This is a real camera.

 

[Tornado]

What would be the point of this?

"What would be the point of discussing the thing that the topic is, in theory, supposed to be about?"

 

[Stylel_Code]

"What would be the point of discussing the thing that the topic is, in theory, supposed to be about?"

I stand corrected after seeing gtuned's post.

 

[jimipitbull]

Sorry for OT.

Is that still someone else noticed that the Mazda from FM5 has no wipers?

If it never rained, you wouldn't need wipers.

 

[X30 Driv3r]

A bit of sarcasm or not what's the harm?

 

[KinLM]

Other tracks in GT6 have some great textures too -->

View attachment 192750 View attachment 192751 View attachment 192756 View attachment 192757 View attachment 192758 View attachment 192759 View attachment 192760 View attachment 192761 View attachment 192762 View attachment 192763 View attachment 192764

What car is that rim shot from? It's beautiful!!

By the way, I would like to say that I am very impressed with @gtuned and his posts. All of his posts have been top notch in this thread. He has stayed on topic, posted good answers to people's requests (such as photos of standards) and is one of few people here who actually is discussing the topic as opposed to bickering about which game has "better FPS" and absolutely irrelevant rubbish.

So, thank you gtuned for being one of the few who's kept things civilized. I've been looking at this thread for a while, and all of your posts have been top notch.

By the way, the post of yours with the photos of standards is STAGGERING. Who knew that models coming from PS2 days could still look anything close to PS3, nevermind XB1 quality? Incredible, my hat is off to you. 👍

 

[GrandTurismo]

Cant beat this. Thats trackdetail and not fancy texture maps.

 

[X30 Driv3r]

I think it's good now. Here it should be a matter which photo mode is better, not which game has the better details. Also, it's utter rubbish next gen graphics with the old generation to compare.